Hacker News Reader

Comment by maxk42 | Hacker News Reader

It's not political. It's done to remember those who died in combat.

Many people have a relative or loved one who died in combat.

I would argue that focusing solely on the nobility of those who died in combat while ignoring what led to them being forced into combat in the first place, is political.

I think the poppy, and Remembrance Day in general, spends far too little time examining _why_ these people were sent to die.

Sounds like you're saying it's political for being insufficiently political.

I’m not about to wade into Canadian culture because I know just enough to be very wrong so I hope it’s fine to use a US parallel.

If Memorial Day was “celebrate the individual personal lives and accomplishments of all these people who died at war” then it’s apolitical. But that isn’t really how it goes unfortunately — I wish it did. Instead it’s about celebrating and glorifying our troops and our military which is super political.

Instead it’s about celebrating and glorifying our troops and our military which is super political.

How is it political - what party do you think it supports?

> How is it political - what party do you think it supports?

Partisan != political. (Though everything is in my opinion political.)

I think the general cultural consensus is WWI is the fault of Europe's leaders, particularly but not completely that of Germany. And was characterized by a callous disregard for soldiers lives on all sides.

That's not the impression I get from the Canadian Remembrance day posts I see on Facebook ever year.

Without fail, all of them describe WWI as a stalwart selfless sacrifice for freedom and the motherland. Then I ask 'exactly what freedoms were at risk', and the authors of those posts start hemming and hawing and tut-tutting.

I wouldn't go as far as to claim that wearing a poppy is a statement for any of the possible interpretations of Remembrance day in particular, though.

Perhaps in Canada, but James McLean may feel differently about the poppy being political. https://deadspin.com/james-mccleans-refusal-to-wear-the-popp...

War is the continuation of politics by other means.

  - Carl von Clausewitz

It is political. It glorifies war and being the aggressor in war. I my country, it's mainly used to represent the time we tried to invade what is now Turkey and killed a bunch of the locals defending their territory. Anti-war people don't like it.

That's not at all what the poppy campaign or the Canadian Legion is all about.

I believe lompotor is from Australia, and is referring in particular to the landing at Gallipoli, in which the British empire was attempting to land in what is now Turkey with support of forces from Commonwealth countries, this certainly included people from Newfoundland. Over the last 25 years, conservative politicians in Australia have have politicised the remembrance of this battle.

It glorifies war.

So putting a photo of my dead wife on my desk at work glorifies car crashes? Got it.

I am sorry for your loss

That analogy doesn't map by my logic. It would be more like putting up a plaque that says, "I'm proud of my brother for engaging in risk taking behavior until it caused him to crash his car and die."

Also, victims of car crashes aren't generally used in national pageantry aimed at causing more car crashes.

> It would be more like putting up a plaque that says, "I'm proud of my brother for engaging in risk taking behavior until it caused him to crash his car and die."

Are you comparing people fighting desperately for national survival, some of whom were conscripts and had no choice, to 'engaging in risk taking behavior' such as driving your car irresponsibly?

Conscripts no. Volunteers sort of. People in WWII less so than WWI less so than most recent conflicts.

But this is exactly my problem with veterans rarara. It's totallizing where we should have razor sharp nuance.

> we should have razor sharp nuance

How about on this day we just say 'it's sad anyone had to die, no matter which side they were on or how they ended up in that situation'? That's what a poppy is.

That begs the question that people "had" to die. That is exactly my problem.

I don't think that's what 'had' means in this context if you read it more charitably.

You can rephrase as 'it's sad anyone died, no matter which side they were on or how they ended up in that situation' if you find it confusing otherwise.

This context is very weird. I don't really have a problem with this tradition. But I do see how it can be political. In the U.S. there is memorial day and veterans day and they are very political.

My main issue is I do not get the analogy. Those two things are very different to me.

> It glorifies war and being the aggressor in war.

How were Canadians aggressors in WW1 and WW2?

I think you're ignorant.

I think lopmotr is from my country, and here people have attempted to politicise the poppy in exactly this way, transforming the meaning from a remembrance of the stupidity of war to a glorification. In small numbers Canadians were present at Gallipoli, the battle at the centre of the politicisation to which I believe lopmotr is correctly referrring

Reply on news.ycombinator.com